Legal Opinion

Ben Motal v. City of Little Rock

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided April 10, 2025Published

1Opinion of the Court

Cite as

2025 Ark. 40

SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. CV-23-470 Opinion Delivered: April 10, 2025 BEN MOTAL APPELLANT DISSENTING OPINION FROM DENIAL OF PETITION FOR REVIEW. V. CITY OF LITTLE ROCK APPELLEE NICHOLAS J. BRONNI, Associate Justice I would grant the petition for review because this case raises two important issues: (1) the limits of a trial court’s inherent authority to award fees; and (2) whether pro se attorneys can recover fees at all. Both warrant this court’s review. Start with the inherent authority point. We’ve previously said that attorney’s fees awards are permissible only when…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Fleischmann Distilling Corp. v. Maier Brewing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. HaegerSupreme Court of the United States · 2017
  3. Ex Parte RobinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
  4. Trope v. KatzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
  5. Stiles v. KearneyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2012

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API